Answer these challenges

LARRY ANDERSON
Larry Anderson

Some of Donald Trump’s presidential decisions have sent his opposition into political apoplexy. Even the idea of an opposing point of view is more than his naysayers can bear.

There is nothing wrong with differences of opinion, but the purpose of argument is to make a presentation so strong the other side is persuaded. I haven’t seen much of that from the left lately. What I have witnessed is name-calling, accusation, hyperbole and lies directed toward Trump and those who voted for him.

That’s before breakfast. After that it gets ugly.

The left should understand raising the scream a few decibels doesn’t make one more correct, and it certainly doesn’t make you more persuasive. Racket turns people off because they realize one doesn’t have anything to say beyond the noise. Chanting does not equal problem resolution.

Too much of the liberal rant is rooted in emotion rather than reasoning.

That is why I am asking liberals to explain their positions on the following issues sensibly. No emotion please.

The left has made it known it is opposed to new pipelines such as Keystone XL which would contribute greatly to jobs and energy independence while cementing an economic alliance with a neighbor. Trump will move the pipeline forward.

The biggest argument against the pipeline is environmental. Before you defend your position, liberals, consider the following:

We have pipelines all over the country. The forty-year-old Alaska pipeline alone is over 800 miles long, but a spill can be identified and shut down within four minutes.

Spills are unlikely because the oil is contained within the pipe. The pipe is made of steel, not paper.

If your argument is pipeline construction is bad for the environment, then we should never build another highway, airport or football stadium. They too must have excavation. Should all building come to a halt?

One complaint about the Dakota Access Pipeline is the assumed danger to the Missouri river, a primary source of water for Native Americans and many others. However, we already have eight pipelines running under the river. Where is the hazard? A spill, however unlikely, would go down, not up.

If the argument is we don’t need more pipelines because the consumption of fossil fuels is contributing to global warming, then please describe the alternatives to oil that are in place now.

Explain how limiting our own access to plentiful and fairly inexpensive energy is going to influence other oil-producing nations such as Russia and Venezuela or coalitions such as OPEC to limit their production. These economies aren’t going to stop producing oil simply because we might lack the foresight to produce it ourselves in every way possible.

How would market expansion and consumption abate due to our “leadership”? Other countries will do what they want.

The left is generally opposed to the building of a wall on our nation’s southern border which Trump will push. I would like liberals to defend their position after considering the following points. Again, keep it sensible, not emotional.

Why can’t liberals distinguish between legal and illegal immigration?

If your argument hinges on this is a nation of immigrants, how can you not know past immigration was legal, even encouraged, but regulated?

Can you point to a part of the Constitution or any legal reference that states this country has to take immigrants?

Can you present a coherent argument against the wall without coupling it to accusations of racism?

Explain how an open border is better than a controlled worker program like this country used to have before we lost our minds.

Please explain how other countries will solve their internal problems as long as they can send their problems to us.

Explain how Mexico is being a good neighbor when it does little to prevent illegal immigration into this country, thereby scorning our laws.

Justify the spending of billions on non-citizens.

Explain why you want heroin, meth, cocaine and pot flowing into our cities illegally from Mexico. Is it because you want more drug problems?

Describe why you want stagnant wages, drug gangs and rising social and economic pressure placed on citizens and municipalities.

Explain why Mexico has a wall on its border with Nicaragua.

I and other conservatives will be waiting for a rationale. It would be cool if a liberal somewhere would provide one.

Not as cool as Tommy James and the Shondells, you understand, but pretty cool.

Larry W. Anderson is a retired educator, author and lifelong Northwest Missourian.